List Location Filter Options

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, providing a strong safety profile. The description adds that it returns a JSON array of filter values and includes endpoint details, but does not offer further behavioral context beyond the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise with four sentences covering purpose, usage, return format, required parameter, and endpoint. It is front-loaded and efficient, with no unnecessary information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity and rich annotations, the description adequately covers what the tool does, its return format, and required parameter. It could mention pagination behavior or error scenarios, but it is sufficient for an agent to use correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description only mentions that project_id is required, which is already in the schema. No additional parameter semantics are provided.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states that it returns available location filters for Coordination Issues, with specific use cases like enumeration, finding IDs, and filtering. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling filter option tools by specifying the context (Coordination Issues) and the exact filter type (location_id).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides clear context on when to use this tool (to enumerate Coordination Issues, find IDs, filter by query parameters) and mentions the required parameter. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with alternative filter options, though the specificity reduces ambiguity.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.